PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
Texas Instruments Incorporated (TXN)
205.980.01 (0.00%)
205.24 - 207.41
139.95 - 221.69
4.54M / 6.54M (Avg.)
37.59 | 5.48
Steady, sustainable growth is a hallmark of high-quality businesses. Value investors watch these metrics to confirm that the company's fundamental performance aligns with—or outpaces—its current market valuation.
0.06%
Revenue growth under 50% of AMD's 20.72%. Michael Burry would suspect a deteriorating sales pipeline or weaker brand.
-2.03%
Negative gross profit growth while AMD is at 36.02%. Joel Greenblatt would examine cost competitiveness or demand decline.
6.44%
EBIT growth below 50% of AMD's 161.30%. Michael Burry would suspect deeper competitive or cost structure issues.
6.44%
Operating income growth under 50% of AMD's 161.30%. Michael Burry would be concerned about deeper cost or sales issues.
3.80%
Net income growth under 50% of AMD's 25.77%. Michael Burry would suspect the firm is falling well behind a key competitor.
5.13%
Positive EPS growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a significant comparative advantage in per-share earnings dynamics.
5.26%
Positive diluted EPS growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong relative advantage in controlling dilution.
-1.23%
Share reduction while AMD is at 16.30%. Joel Greenblatt would see if the company has a better buyback policy than the competitor.
-1.50%
Reduced diluted shares while AMD is at 11.64%. Joel Greenblatt would see a relative advantage if the competitor is diluting more.
194294.01%
Dividend growth of 194294.01% while AMD is flat. Bruce Berkowitz would see if this can become a bigger advantage long term.
-40.03%
Negative OCF growth while AMD is at 25.21%. Joel Greenblatt would demand a turnaround plan focusing on real cash generation.
-47.18%
Negative FCF growth while AMD is at 211.63%. Joel Greenblatt would demand improved cost control or more strategic capex discipline.
-5.84%
Negative 10Y revenue/share CAGR while AMD stands at 84.89%. Joel Greenblatt would question if the company is failing to keep pace with industry changes.
28.37%
5Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 5.96%. David Dodd would look for consistent product or market expansions fueling outperformance.
70.09%
3Y revenue/share CAGR at 50-75% of AMD's 97.71%. Martin Whitman would question if the firm lags behind competitor innovations.
61.20%
10Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of AMD's 143.63%. Michael Burry would worry about a persistent underperformance in cash creation.
49.82%
5Y OCF/share CAGR 1.25-1.5x AMD's 45.28%. Bruce Berkowitz would see if capital spending or working-capital efficiencies explain the difference.
24.02%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of AMD's 504.47%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
112.59%
Net income/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 2.57% over 10 years. David Dodd would confirm if brand, IP, or scale secure this persistent advantage.
11.83%
Positive 5Y CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might view this as a strong mid-term relative advantage.
213.01%
3Y net income/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 108.26%. David Dodd would confirm the company’s short-term strategies outmatch the competitor significantly.
175.31%
Positive growth while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a strong advantage in steadily compounding net worth over a decade.
2.48%
Positive 5Y equity/share CAGR while AMD is negative. John Neff might see a clear edge in retaining earnings or managing capital better.
13.01%
3Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x AMD's 0.29%. David Dodd verifies the company’s short-term capital management far exceeds the competitor’s pace.
37.38%
Dividend/share CAGR of 37.38% while AMD is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a slight advantage in stepping up payouts steadily.
40.20%
Dividend/share CAGR of 40.20% while AMD is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor advantage in stepping up distributions, even modestly.
35.49%
3Y dividend/share CAGR of 35.49% while AMD is zero. Bruce Berkowitz sees a minor positive difference that could attract dividend-focused investors.
-13.94%
Firm’s AR is declining while AMD shows 10.10%. Joel Greenblatt sees stronger working capital efficiency if sales hold up.
9.93%
We show growth while AMD is shrinking stock. John Neff wonders if the competitor is more disciplined or has weaker demand expectations.
0.53%
Positive asset growth while AMD is shrinking. John Neff sees potential for us to outgrow the competitor if returns are solid.
1.79%
Positive BV/share change while AMD is negative. John Neff sees a clear edge over a competitor losing equity.
84.64%
We have some new debt while AMD reduces theirs. John Neff sees the competitor as more cautious unless our expansions pay off strongly.
-5.12%
Our R&D shrinks while AMD invests at 13.94%. Joel Greenblatt checks if we risk falling behind a competitor’s new product pipeline.
4.17%
SG&A declining or stable vs. AMD's 22.56%. David Dodd sees better overhead efficiency if it doesn't hamper revenue.